Cambridge University discriminates against children from private schools.

[Marchesman]

MN threads persist in claiming that Oxford and Cambridge Universities do not discriminate against private schools. Now two "academics" have written a half-baked book that argues for further reductions in the number of Oxbridge students from private schools (to 10% of the intake).

In 2023 at Cambridge 19.9% of students from comprehensive schools obtained first class degrees (23.5% from grammar schools) compared with 28.6% from private schools - evidence of unequivocal discrimination against the latter at the point of entry.

Cambridge's own analysis shows that British state-educated students already significantly underperform relative to foreign and privately educated British students. If more of the latter are excluded, the inevitable outcome will be that at these universities the best students are foreign, while the best British pupils decamp to US universities.

Is this really what the Left wants? If so why?

I can only assume you are taking the piss!

If you have to take out a loan to go to Cambridge you shouldn't be in Cambridge. It's that simple

It's wind up, trying to create an image of PS parent, not entirely illegible, better to ignore

Dh is a partner in a law firm (state school / Cambridge student loan paid off back in the mists of time). He has never been into a sports direct store let one worked in one.

Good for him but the exception is not the rule.
Most of these students from lower class families will amount to nothing just like their parents did. This is statistically true it's a complete waste of money, time and uni spaces for them to get student loans

My kids weren't interested in that area of work, so that doesn't factor into my attitude.

Both the kids I'm taking about magically got opportunities that others without that open door, would kill for. They were great kids, don't get me wrong. But neither was super intelligent. They did, however, have the poise and confidence that the school instilled in them.

I stand by my belief that there would have been many, many state school educated graduates who would have been offering more, intelligence-wise. And I think my friend knew it himself. But that's what he felt he paid for. The almost seamless progression between school, uni and a top flight internship/graduate role, that a state school educated graduate with the same A level results could only dream of. .

The son (now in his late 30s) is now earning stratospheric money and living in Geneva. I honestly don't think that would ever have happened without the old school tie.

Students coming out in 2023 would have entered in 2020…the height of the covid confusion. I presume a lot of applicants made their offers who shouldn’t have in normal circumstances. Situations where Cambridge really wanted to give someone a chance and was depending upon A level grades as a sieve, in case they had been over optimistic.

It was reported that private schools had more grade inflation though. We don’t have much granularity of data. Perhaps an inflation from A to A is not as detrimental as an inflation from B to A, but who knows?

Hmm, could it possibly be that populist rhetoric against private schools over-reported the grade inflation in private schools and under-reported the grade inflation in state schools?

And that admissions tutors were then even more biased than usual? Excluding private school students who were above the caliber of state school students they did admit: by twice the usual (already high) percentage.

If the sudden, extreme jump was a year later, you could infer that it was due to worse teaching in state schools than private during covid. Then someone who believed in 'intrinsic academic worth' might think that justified the lower achiever being admitted, since they 'should' have been taught better at school and then been able to achieve more in their degree. But the increased bias started in 2023: so that first cohort had their exams disrupted, but not their teaching.

Populism is always harmful to a society.

Populism against the most educated, capable, high-achieving part of your society is mind-blowing self-sabotage.

I think there seems to be some sort of persecution complex going on here. Your children are still 5 x more likely to get into Oxford from a PS than a state. Your children used to be significantly advantaged and they still are far more advantaged don’t worry about that! Now efforts are being made to reduce that gap. And this angers you. Come on. A relative works in this field (and sends her own children to PS) and this is the reality of the situation.

Not a persecution complex, not angry, just looking at the statistical facts.

It all comes down to what we want the purpose of our elite universities to be.

If they are principally a tool for social engineering - and we're happy to degrade their international competitiveness as a consequence - then that should be an active decision.

I think it's a poor choice for the UK. And definitely a poor choice for Cambridge. But as people have pointed out, Cambridge are revisiting that choice as the consequences become apparent. So all is (hopefully) good.

Honestly. You don’t need to worry. Your children are still far far ahead statistically in getting into Oxbridge. They are attempting to reduce the large advantage that will still be there. Only the brightest students get in there is no dumbing down. Two of dds state school friends who are insanely intelligent and incredible girls with other intests etc and neither of them got in - so I can only imagine how good the candidates that did get in were!

Do you find that saying 'calm down dear' normally works?

It's in my nature to think about and understand things. I'm certainly not going to stop just because some stranger on the Internet tells me it's not worth worrying about.

Based on some anecdotes about some kids she knows who she thinks are very clever.

Alongside some ridiculous trope like 'still 5 x more likely to get into Oxford from a PS than a state' without even glancing consideration into what that actually means and why it might be.

Obviously not thinking about correlating factors, eg comparing the probability of getting in from state school + top quintile SES versus getting in from state + bottom quintile SES. Why that might be. And thinking about how SES is represented in private schools. Etc.

If it isn't immediately obvious to you that the 5x statistic is completely meaningless, then I guess the significance of the OP's stats might escape you as well.

It’s not worth worrying about. Of all the things going on in the world and this is what you are worried about?! Insane. But enjoy your day!

Not worried: but interested.

It's something I can change my behaviour in response to. So arguably more useful to think about than most of the other problems in the world!

Hope you enjoy your day too.

Agree with all of this. Not at all surprised at the snippy response from the OP commenting on a spelling mistake and nothing else.

Agree- @Marchesman reminds me of Mary Bennett.

Truly intelligent people are able to make their point without being overly florid.

I work in a very academic field and expect people to be able to convey complex ideas with precision and clarity.

Comparing the average state school students chances of a Cambridge offer vs the average Private School pupil’s chance is nonsense.

We have to compare the pool in each camp with all As and A*s at A-level.

Truly intelligent people don't attempt to distract from a person's arguments by ridiculing them.

The literary reference doesn't make it better.

That behaviour would be seen through pretty quickly in my field. Can't say what's the norm in academia.

@Marchesman My children were privately educated from three, went to one of the Clarendon Commission's nine schools with academic scholarships, Oxford (one as a scholar) and then into the higher reaches of traditional (non-medical) professions, where they have garnered accolades.

This is all well and good, but can they flob a greenie onto the back of someone’s blazer from three meters away like many of the kids at my comp.

Truly intelligent people are able to make their point without being overly florid

so that unintelligent people can understand them?

I think being florid with language is a wonderful and underappreciated skill!

Complex words have their place. But wrongly used or used unnecessarily then they just make the writer look a bit insecure.

There is a real craft to clear and concise writing.

The key point for me is as follows:

Picture a lower middle class family with identical twins. One goes to state school, the other goes to private school on some sort of scholarship (let’s assume passion for music). They both get the identical grades at A level and they both apply for the same course at Cambridge. Let’s assume it’s a very oversubscribed course like Computer Science, Law, Economics etc
The state school twin gets in and the private school kid does not.

Is that a problem? Discuss.